How I found myself to be an "Expressive Analytical."

So, today I had another interview for an office administration job. (For those of you playing along at home, this was Company #5 that I've interviewed with.) It was with a Chicago-based "holistic chiropractors" office. I met the resident chiropractor and the girl that I would be replacing, if I took the job. (She's engaged to be married and will be leaving soon to live with new husband in Portland, OR.)

The first thing that I noticed was that she sits on a giant exercise ball, with no back to it, in the reception area. And I wondered to myself, "Would I be asked to sit on that thing, too, if I work here?" I wonder if it was her idea or the chief chiropractors way of showing how progressive his office was. His office manager sits on a ball.

Like a trained Russian bear.

I dunno how that is going to work out for me and my demanding butt. My butt demands a proper chair, when sitting. I'm sorry. That's just the way my demanding butt likes it. Got a problem with that? Take it up with my butt.

Not that it matters all that much. I don't think I have a very good chance of getting the job. Dr. Ball-Chair let slip that my LEAP test results didn't indicate that I was a strong candidate for the job. (More on that, below.)

I want to talk briefly about the LEAP aptitude test for a second here. The LEAP aptitude test is a variation on the DISC aptitude test. (A test which was invented by Dr. William Moulton Marston, who also invented Wonder Woman, the polygraph test and was in a polyamorous relationship for most of his adult life.

The general idea of both tests is that all personality types can be placed on a graph divided into four equal parts. Each letter of DISC stands for one of the four archetypes.

* Dominance: People who score high in the intensity of the 'D' styles factor are very active in dealing with problems and challenges, while low D scores are people who want to do more research before committing to a decision. High "D" people are described as demanding, forceful, egocentric, strong willed, driving, determined, ambitious, aggressive, and pioneering. Low D scores describe those who are conservative, low keyed, cooperative, calculating, undemanding, cautious, mild, agreeable, modest and peaceful.

* Influence: People with High I scores influence others through talking and activity and tend to be emotional. They are described as convincing, magnetic, political, enthusiastic, persuasive, warm, demonstrative, trusting, and optimistic. Those with Low I scores influence more by data and facts, and not with feelings. They are described as reflective, factual, calculating, skeptical, logical, suspicious, matter of fact, pessimistic, and critical.

* Steadiness:(Submission in Marston's time): People with High S styles scores want a steady pace, security, and don't like sudden change. Low S intensity scores are those who like change and variety. High S persons are calm, relaxed, patient, possessive, predictable, deliberate, stable, consistent, and tend to be unemotional and poker faced. People with Low S scores are described as restless, demonstrative, impatient, eager, or even impulsive.

* Conscientious: (Compliance in Marston's time): Persons with High C styles adhere to rules, regulations, and structure. They like to do quality work and do it right the first time. High C people are careful, cautious, exacting, neat, systematic, diplomatic, accurate, tactful. Those with Low C scores challenge the rules and want independence and are described as self-willed, stubborn, opinionated, unsystematic, arbitrary, and careless with details.

To get your reading on the DISC test, you are given a 20 different groupings of 4 sentences. You're supposed to rate the sentence that best describes you with a "4" and then the next sentence that slightly less well describes you with a "3" and so on until the sentence that LEAST describes you most of all, is rated a "1". Once you complete the test, your reviewer feeds your numerical ratings into the DISC computer and it assigns a numerical value (up to 50) in one of the 4 categories stated above, based on the sentences that YOU determine describe you best. In this way, you see which category you identify with the most. And which one you have the least skills in.

As one potential employer described it to me, "I can take your test results and remove your name from it and pass it around the office and everyone can tell EXACTLY who it's describing, just by the way that it describes you. It's THAT ACCURATE!" Later, he said, "We're firm believers in the DISC assessment test here. You don't mind taking it, do you?"

The LEAD test that I took today is basically the same test, except the terms are a little different. (At this link, you can see the titles that several of the variations on this test, use.) With the LEAD test, the acronym breaks down to...

Leader = Dominance.

Expresser = Influence.

Dependable = Steadiness.

Analyst = Conscientious.

The explanations for the LEAD test categories are basically the same as the DISC assessment, that I described above.

I have now taken the test twice. The first time, the potentially hiring company never gave me the results of my test. The request to take the test was in my emailbox when I got home from the interview. I emailed them back immediately, thanked them for the interview and promised to return the test as soon as possible. Definitely before they left for the day. Thirty minutes later, I'd labeled 1 - 4 for everything and emailed away the results to them.

Today, I took the LEAD test in less than twenty minutes. I saw the same sorts of comments pop up on both tests.

Now that I've gotten a better understanding for what these two tests assess, I have formed my carefully considered opinion of them.

I don't like them.
Not one little bit.
Employers may have drank the Kool-Aid that these tests best assess an applicants skill sets, but I don't buy it.

First off, there's data that suggests that these types of psychometric tests aren't reliable at all. Look at this quote about the reliability of the Myers-Briggs Test. (Myers-Briggs is another, more highly detailed, psychometric test.)

The reliability of the test has been interpreted as being low, with test takers who retake the test often being assigned a different type. According to surveys performed by the proponents of Myers-Briggs, the highest percentage of people fell into the same category on the second test is only 47%. Furthermore, a wide range of 39% - 76% of those tested fall into different types upon retesting weeks or years later, and many people's types also found to vary according to the time of the day.

So, whether I've had my coffee in the morning can throw my test? That doesn't sound very reliable to me.

I also have a problem how these tests are reviewed.

When an employer submits the answers to the testing website, the results are printed out in a column of numbers indicating what value I assigned each sentence, with no copy of the sentence listed next to it! Below that, a numerical value is placed in each one of my L or E or A or D categories.

The guy who tested me today, showed me the test result. I scored a 56 in Expressiveness. A 53 in Analytical. A 53 in Dependable. And a 38 in Leadership.

Before he showed me the results, he said, "Well, it looks like you're an Expressive Analytical! I have to tell you, I'm looking more for a Dependable Leader to fill this job opening today."

I said, "Huh. That's interesting. Do you mind if I ask what my values are?"

He read them off to me. And I said, "You know what I find interesting? That there isn't a HUGE gap between any of those values. Between my highest score and my lowest is only an 18 point gap. Which tells me that I'm pretty balanced between all of those aspects."

"Yeah, it does look that way, doesn't it." he said. And he slid my test results, with my resume into his plump file of other resumes and other test results. His mind was made up. I was an Expressive Analytical. He was looking for a Dependable Leader. I clearly wasn't the candidate for him.

Which is frustrating to me.
The employers mindless reliance on the LEAD test result totally skews the interview down a counter-productive path. I can guess from the lack of response from the first person who gave me the test that I came up with similar numbers. Maybe they were looking for a Dependable Leader, too.

But nowhere in those number values, does it account for some critical data that I think is equally important and altogether more telling.

-Nowhere in that data, does it reflect that I filled out both tests quickly and thoroughly, when asked to. Nowhere does it reflect that I did the first test in less than twenty minutes and emailed it back, asap. A very eager and ready potential employee.

-Nowhere in those tests does it actually show you what numbers I assigned to each sentence. And some of those sentences are pretty loony. Here's an example of what four of those sentences might look like.

1. I work diligently when unsupervised.
2. I am well-liked by many people.
3. I see each task through to the end.
4. I have smart ideas that help to refine business practices.

Fuck me! I want to put a "4" next to every one of those sentences. They all describe both who I am and how I want to operate as an employee. But because of the nature of the test, you HAVE TO put a "1" next to one of those, thereby saying, "Doh! I guess I am not very well liked by many people! People just don't like me!" Is that the message you want to communicate to your future employer?

Similarly, let's say that I put a "1" next to "I see each task through to the end." Isn't that the sort of thing the employer wants to know? This potential employee doesn't finish what he starts! That's a fairly important thing to know. And yet, the DISC or LEAD test looks at that rating and says, "Well, he's slightly less than dependable." Which is a million miles away from "I don't get stuff done." The test results don't tell you that though. They're too busy making broad sweeping generalizations about your personality to take a look at the particulars of your actual self-assessment.

Which is, to my way of thinking, counter-intuitive at best. Blindingly stupid, at worst.

And I saw this sort of thing in action today. "Sorry! You're an Expressive Analytical. We need a Dependable Leader. Here's your title. Good Luck getting employed, Mr. Expressive." Meanwhile, the knuckle-dragging Neanderthal in line behind me for an interview, has just strangled a van-load of people to steal their shoes, but because he completed the task thoroughly, he's a Dependable Leader.

Well done, DISC and LEAD testing for putting up yet another obstacle for the modern business world in it's hiring practices. I'm sure you'll weed out us Expressive types and really promote the Leaders to the job that they deserve. That of the $12-an-hour, Office Receptionist.

Expressively Yours,
Mr.B



PS: Now that I know how these tests work and what they grade for, I'm officially cheating, from now on. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to identify the "Leader" responses. The next time I take the test, I'll skew my answers to identify me as a Leader or an Analytical type. That's all they're looking for anyways. Chalk it up to my being more "analytical" about how I take the test and "leading" myself to giving them the answers they want to hear. Take that, Wonder Woman!